ware yes First adopter of new technologies? State-of-the-art stuff is expensive, which means the North is often extremely rich. Early adopters are encouraged by cut-throat competition to look beyond the status quo. As such, there may be no group more likely to pick up new tools than the uber-rich and hyper-competitive hedge-fund industry.
This rule artificial intelligence (AI)oh) and machine learning, which were first employed by hedge funds decades ago, before their recent publicity. First came the “quants,” or quantitative investors, who use data and algorithms to pick stocks and make short-term bets on which assets will rise and fall. Two Sigma, a quant fund in New York, has been using these techniques since its inception in 2001. The Man Group, a British outfit with a large quant arm, launched its first machine-learning fund in 2014. aqr Capital Management, from Greenwich, Connecticut, began using oh Around the same time. Then came the rest of the industries. Demonstrates hedge fund experience ohhas the potential to revolutionize business—but it also shows that doing so takes time, and progress can be inhibited.
oh And the machine-learning funds looked like the last step in the march of the robots. The inexpensive index fund, with stocks selected by algorithms, had already grown in size, with assets under management eclipsing traditional active funds in 2019. human participation. The flagship fund of Renaissance Technologies, the first quant outfit set up in 1982, generated average annual returns of 66% over the decades. Faster cables in the 2000s gave rise to high-frequency market makers, including Citadel Securities and Vertu, capable of trading stocks by nanoseconds. new quant outfits, like aqr And Two Sigma outwits the humans’ reputation and usurps the properties.
By the end of 2019, automated algorithms took both sides of the trades; More frequently high-frequency traders faced off against quant investors who had automated their investing processes; The algorithm manages the majority of investors’ assets in passive index funds; And all of the largest, most successful hedge funds used quantitative methods, at least to some degree. The traditional types were throwing in the towel. Philippe Jabre, a star investor, blamed computerized models that had “inexplicably replaced” traditional actors when he closed his fund in 2018. As a result of all this automation, the stockmarket was more efficient than ever. Execution was very fast and the cost was almost zero. Individuals can invest savings for a fraction of a penny on the dollar.
Machine learning promised even more fruit. The way one investor described it was that quantitative investing began with a hypothesis: that momentum, or the idea that stocks that have risen faster than the rest of the index, will continue to do so. This hypothesis allows individual stocks to be tested against historical data to assess whether their value will continue to rise. In contrast, with machine learning, investors can “start with data and look for hypotheses”. In other words, the algorithm can decide what to choose and why to choose.
Yet the great march of automation hasn’t been continuous—humans have fought back. By the end of 2019, all major retail brokers, including Charles Schwab, I,Business And td Ameritrade, due to competition from a new entrant, Robinhood, reduced commissions to zero. After a few months, due to pandemic boredom and stimulus checks, retail business began to boom. This peaked in the frenetic early months of 2021, when day traders, coordinating on social media, piled into unpublished stocks, driving up their prices. At the same time, many quantitative strategies seemed to be stalling. In 2020 and early 2021, most quants underperformed the markets as well as human hedge funds. aqr A handful of funds were closed after continuous outflows.
When the markets turned in 2022, many of these trends were flipped. The retail side of the business fell back as losses piled up. The Quants are back with a vengeance. aqrThe fund with the longest exposure gave a return of 44% even though the market declined by 20%.
This zigzag, and the growing role of robots, holds lessons for other industries. The first is that humans can react to new technology in unpredictable ways. The falling cost of trade execution seemed to power the investment machines – until the cost dropped to zero, at which point it fueled a retail renaissance. Even if the share of retail in trading is not at its peak, it remains high compared to pre-2019. Retail trades now make up a third of the trading volume in stocks (excluding market makers). His dominance of stock options, a type of derivative bet on stocks even better,
The second is that not all technologies make markets more efficient. one of the explanations for aqr’s The period of low performance, argues the firm’s co-founder, Cliff Asness, is how extreme valuations occurred and how long “everything bubbled up”. Partly this could be a result of excessive enthusiasm among retail investors. “Getting information and getting it quickly doesn’t mean processing it well,” Mr. Asnes says. “I think things like social media make markets less, not more, efficient… people don’t listen to counter-opinions, they listen to their own opinions, and that can be some of the dangerous craziness in politics and the markets really. Some strange values lead to action.”
The third is that it takes time for the robot to find its place. Machine-learning funds have been around for a while and tend to outperform human competitors, at least a little. But he hasn’t amassed huge wealth, because he’s a hard sell. After all, few people understand the risks involved. Those who have dedicated their careers to machine learning are acutely aware of this. “We’ve invested a lot in explaining to clients why we think machine-learning strategies should be doing what they’re doing,” reports Greg Bond of Man Numeric, the quantitative arm of Man Group.
There was a time when everyone thought the quants had it figured out. This concept is not there today. When it comes to the stockmarket, at least, automation hasn’t been the winner-take-all event that many fear elsewhere. It is like a tug of war between humans and machines. And although the machines are winning, the humans haven’t given up yet.
Sign up for more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and the markets money TalksOur weekly subscriber-only newsletter.